This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
The Critical Race Theory emerged during the civil rights movement which formed part of the legal scholarship which means the study and analysis of law. Though application of CRT can be seen in numerous disciplines, CRT challenged liberalist points of view such as color blindness of the law, neutrality, and objectivity and contends that the above principles are the ones that actually spread and tolerate racism by ignoring the inequalities permeating in social institutions. CRT draws its principles from diverse fields of study such as sociology, history, feminist and postcolonial studies, economics, political science, and ethnic and cultural studies. Generally, CRT analyzes, deconstructs, and transforms the interplay among power, racism, and race (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001).
CRT states that in analyzing the law it is impossible to take a neutral and objective position and likewise emphasizes that for racial reform to occur radically, voices of races must be recognized and race consciousness encouraged. Since race plays as a scaffolding in American society, "there can be no perch outside the social dynamics of racial power from which to merely observe and analyze" (Crenshaw, Gotanda, Peller, & Thomas, 1995, p. xiii). Refuted in CRT are two foremost liberalist assertions pertaining to law: (1) colorblindness of the law and (2) that this color blindness is above race consciousness. For instance, the argument of Gotanda (2000) stated that in itself the concept that the law is colorblind is contradictory because by excluding races from the process of decision making would entail the initial acknowledgement on the existence of races. He concluded that color blindness which denotes the choice of excluding races is based on the actual premise of race than being neutral. Despite the diversity of approaches and thrusts of CRT theorists and practitioners, their study of the law and advocacy have common grounds which are as follows:
1. The first ground implies the endemic nature of racism. In CRT, racism is not regarded as individualistic or abnormal but an ordinary day to day occurrence affecting a group of people specifically people of color. Owing to history, racism is deeply seated in American culture which permeates social practices and structures. Because of the nature of racism being ordinary and embedded, its impact on the way how individuals think are often imperceptible, particularly those individuals who have racial privilege. This invisibility consequently maintains racism in society.
2. In the second, race is regarded as a social construction. CRT argues that race is a contrived scheme where people are categorized with reference to observable physical features that have no association to the reality of genetics and biology. Though CRT views race as a social construction, there is due recognition on the force of its implications and meaning in society.
3. The third is differential racialization. Social discourses that are dominant and individuals in authority and power are capable of racializing groups of individuals in different ways and at different time period, depending on the economic, social or historic need. For instance, there are some Asian Americans considered by majority of society as benign, if not favorable, when America is in desperate need of a huge, inexpensive labor force which most Asian countries provide the American economy. As time progress Asian Americans have increasingly become more financially independent and secure that they have been viewed as threats to the national economy. These groups have been demonized and excluded from citizenship by law. Because of the reversal of racialization for the third time, Asian Americans are regarded as "model minority."
4. The fourth is known as interest convergence/materialist determinism. Racism results in the majority or ruling race having both psychic and material advantage that when race changes progressively only if convergence of interests of both the ruling race which is powerful and the race that is subjugated or oppressed (Bell, 1995).
5. Fifth is referred to as voices of color. When the dominant performs an inventory of their history, they tend to routinely exclude perspectives about African Americans and other minority groups so that their power is justified and legitimized. This so called silencing of these perspectives minimizes and obscures the interplay of oppression and power across time and space. CRT pushes for the rewritten history by including lived experiences of the oppressed races from their own perspectives and verbalized in their own words. Bringing their stories and narrations serves to challenge liberalist concepts of universal truths, color blindness and neutrality (Delgado, 1989).
6. The last is termed antiessentialism/intersectionality. The theory recognizes the intersectionality of oppressions and implies that when race is primarily focused, it has the tendency of eclipsing other types of exclusion. For example, the underserved race, sexual orientation such as an underprivileged gay African American presents a very complex and extraordinary case of social location than when only one aspect of the identity is studied alone. As a matter of fact, CRT authorities claimed that when analysis is undertaken in the absence of a multidimensional framework, there is a probability of replicating the fundamental patterns of social exclusion that it sought to eradicate and can result in the essentializing of episodes of oppression (Hutchinson, 2000). To act of essentializing oppression both a political choice which presents several problems when viewed from a strategic point of view. Though all marginalized groups share the same experiences of oppression, it is not very clear whether efforts aimed at social reformation should aim oppression from either a particularized (antiessential) or communal (essentialized) viewpoint. In society, coalitions exert greater influence in effecting changes in society; however, prioritizing much broader concerns than individual experiences forces individuals to choose one sole identity, with the other facets of their experiences left unanswered (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). Uncertainty underlying this dilemma is the source of numerous internal debates in CRT.
Instructional Leadership Theory
Instructional and transformational leadership theories are emergent theories as interest in the investigation of leadership progressed rapidly (Heck & Hallinger, 1999). The distinction of these models from previously developed ones is its focus on the way the school administrators and educators enhance pedagogical instruction and learning. The focus of instructional leaders is on the accomplishment of school goals, development of a balanced and integrated curriculum, effective instruction, and conducive school environment. On the other hand, transformational leaders concentrate on means to restructure the school by improving school conditions. Huber and West (2002) divided stages of leadership into four. The first involves the personality or trait theory of leadership which states that for leaders to be successful they need to possess certain qualities and characteristics found in good leaders. The personality theory bases its assumptions on the lives of honorable men and women leaders in world history like Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Winston Churchill, and Margaret Thatcher. According to the personality theory, leaders should gain insight on the lives of these individuals and attempt to imitate their attitudes and behaviors. These leaders vary significantly in those qualities and emulating their behaviors is a seemingly daunting task to perform. The Trait Approach of Stogdill (1974) emerged from the "Great Man" theory which identified characteristics that best describes successful leaders. The belief is that when this approach is employed, individuals that exhibit these critically important leadership traits can be selected and given top positions in an organization or company. This is commonly used in the armed forces by considering a set of criteria in the selection of candidates. The concern with this approach is in its dependency on numerous traits identified in previous and recent studies. After many years of trait research, no trait seemed to be consistent. Though some traits were noted in a volume of studies, results were still inconclusive. Some supervisors might possess particular traits but lack of these traits does not indicate that the person is not a leader. Despite the little consistencies in some trait researches, some traits appeared more frequently than others which include: "technical skill, friendliness, task motivation, application to task, group task supportiveness, social skill, emotional control, administrative skill, general charisma, and intelligence". Of these characteristics, "charisma" was apparently well-studied.
The second phase entails the examination of what good leaders are capable of doing. In this phase, there are traits believed to be integral in successful leadership; however, according to studies, there is no definitive relationship between certain traits or groups of traits on effective leadership or high leadership quality. The Hersey-Blanchard Leadership Model also explains leadership quality. This model suggests that the development of the supervisor's subordinates have a significant role to play in pinpointing the most appropriate leadership styles. Bases for this theory are quantity of direction and social and emotional support a supervisor should provide when faced with certain situations and the "level of maturity" of subordinates. The first referred as task behavior is defined as the "extent to which the leader engages in spelling out the duties and responsibilities to an individual or group". Examples could be giving employees or subordinates instructions of a particular task. In this task behavior, the communication is from leader to follower and therefore is one-way. Relationship behavior refers to the level the leader takes part in a two- or multi-way communication in contrast to task behavior. This behavior involves support, facilitating as well as listening skills. As a result, socio-emotional support is provided. Maturity denotes the eagerness and capacity of a person to assume accountability for his or her behavior. The model also acknowledges the fact that individuals differ in their level of maturity depending on the task assigned, objective or function.
What comes next after these two phases is the situational methodology to leadership. In this phase, investigators focus their attention to the context in which there has been an exercise of leadership. There is a relatively different interpretation of people-centered and task-related leadership behaviors under different circumstances. Researchers have made attempts in order to separate properties of leadership situations relating them to the behavior and performance of the leader. In the fourth phase, organizational culture is linked to the leader and this constitutes the transformational model of leadership. Both models on instructional and transformational leadership are debated by scholars over the past decade. Currently, the focus is on associating the behavior of the leader to the culture of the organization (Murphy, 2002).
The model on instructional leadership first sprang in the early 80s when researchers were interested in studying the characteristics of effective schools. When contrasted with earlier models, the instructional leadership theory focuses on how leadership improves educational outcomes. Essentially, the role of the principal is to look after the teachers as the teachers focus on the learning of their students. The school principal's leadership is crucial in promoting school effectiveness. School leaders should have their eyes fixed on teacher behaviors as teachers guide and facilitate student learning in the classrooms. Hallinger (2003) summarized the concept of instructional leadership into three dimensions: first is delineating the mission of the school, second is the management of the school's program of instruction, and third, promotion of an academic climate that is conducive for student learning. To supplement this idea, the functions of instructional leaders are outline by Hallinger.
Dimmock (1995) asserted the nature of instructional leadership being too dogmatic relying on a top bottom management approach. This structure prescribes the notion that when school principals are able to perform tasks expected of them, there is a corresponding improvement in instruction and learning. He suggested that schools are described by "loose coupling and autonomy" and a more efficient strategy would be to employ a bottom-up approach. What he proposed is a "backward mapping" that usually begins with assessment of student performance based on outcomes then looking further at how students learn; teaching methods used; organization and structure of the school; leadership, school climate or culture, and management. According to him, this strategy and framework would greatly aid communities and schools better address challenges of simultaneously providing effective leadership and sound management in order to promote topnotch teaching and learning. In this framework, the student is essentially at the center therefore school administrators and teachers need to focus on ways to improve learning and performance of their students. Utilizing this paradigm, the base of leadership is first being knowledgeable on the technical aspect of teaching and learning and second, having a well-designed, developed, and evaluated curriculum. Dimmock stated, "The traditional top down linear conceptions of leadership and management and their influence on teaching and learning have become inappropriate" (p. 295). He also revealed that research findings imply that very few principals found that to be an instructional leader is possible and real.
The problem with this paradigm is that many school principals are not educational experts themselves. Furthermore, it is a common observation that principals perceive their roles to be restricted in administrative work and therefore have purposely distanced themselves from classroom climate where instruction and learning are the most significant dependent variables. Hallinger (2003) argued that in most instances, school principals lack the teaching expertise when compared to the teachers under their supervision. This impression is further perplexed by the reality that the authority of the principal is severely constrained since a middle management position is being occupied. In most school systems, the most authoritarian figure is the senior administrator in the district or divisional level. The fact of school systems at present is that principals have to conform with the expectations of various sectors of society as well as the school which include community members, faculty members, parents, and the senior management team. The challenge that lies ahead for a number of principals is collaborate with other educational stakeholders in maintaining balance between conflicting and competing demands from the interest groups.
Devolution and decentralization cause diversion on the focus of the principal in attending to the technical aspect of the school. Numerous school principals are so absorbed with the administrative as well as the managerial responsibilities of day to day school life, that very rarely do they spend time in leading others in the aspects of teaching and learning. The more elaborated and post-modernist adaptations of instructional leadership have seen development to be able to address to the variety of leadership dimensions and evolving leadership studies. Heck and Hallinger (1999) conceptualized that the focus of instructional leadership is the effort of the principal in the definition of the mission and goals of the school, management of the program of instruction, and promotion of a school environment that is safe. Further elaboration of these dimensions includes the ten functions expected of an instructional leader. Reconceptualization of instructional leadership by Marks and Printy (2003) replaced the earlier notions which are procedural and hierarchical with "shared instructional leadership". Using this model, the principal is viewed as the "leader of instructional leaders" not the individual who is responsible independently for the school's leadership initiatives.
Transformational Leadership Theory
It started in the middle of the 1980s, the time when the public was increasingly more demanding to raise the standards of schools to effect further improvement in student outcomes. In addition, this was also the time when leadership in schools was critically observed and the association between school leadership and effectiveness of schools was being challenged. As stated by Adams and Kirst (1999), "The 'excellence movement' was launched, and in its wake followed an evolution in the notion of educational accountability commensurate with the movement's challenge to obtain better student performance" (p. 463). Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach (2002) referred to these initiatives as "large-scale school reform". There were also other initiatives implemented as a mechanism for imposing more accountability and liability. According to Adams and Kirst, "Policy makers, educational leaders, practitioners, and parents also continued to seek better student performance and accountability through management practices, professional standards, teacher commitment, democratic processes, and parent choice" (p. 466). These educational reforms and liability movements are motivators for school principals to enhance student outcomes; however, little has been published on the best practices needed to achieve this. A number of accountability systems and strategies are based solely on high-stakes standardized testing which is usually incongruent with what most educators acknowledge as effective means in the measurement and assessment of quality teaching and learning. Due to the complexity of educational accountability schemes, these are frequently accompanied with internal and external instability that must be moderated by the school principal. This paradigm shift has realigned the focus of principals transforming "old school" principals who now adhere to the new concept of leadership.
As the demand for greater accountability is being forwarded by researchers at the time, there is likewise growing research that attempted to determine the effect of school leadership. New terminologies began to surface in most literature like shared leadership, teacher leadership, distributed leadership and transformational leadership. "The emergence of these models indicated a broader dissatisfaction with the instructional leadership model, which many believed focused too much on the principal as the centre of expertise, power, and authority" (Hallinger, 2003, p. 330).
Leithwood, Begley and Cousins (1994), authors of the book entitled Developing Expert Leadership included a discussion on how leadership practices of the current school administration influence and impact school efficiency. They reviewed 1974 to 1988 studies and attempted to use the results in adding to the body of knowledge on the effect of school leadership. They stated that "First, we must acknowledge significant limitations in the research-based knowledge about the nature of current school-leaders' impact. But, based on the number of studies alone, one can reasonably conclude that current school-leaders are capable of having a significant influence on the basic skills' achievement of students" (p.14). They added the remoteness of evidence pointing towards the other impact.
According to Hallinger (2003), in 1990, scientists have shifted their research attention towards leadership frameworks that are "more consistent with evolving trends in educational reform such as empowerment, shared leadership, and organizational learning. This evolution of the educational leadership role has been labelled as reflecting 'second order' changes (Leithwood et al., 1994) as it is aimed primarily at changing the organization's normative structure" (p. 330). Principally, transformational leadership reflects the characteristics mentioned above according to Avolio (1999), Bass (1997, 1998), Bass & Avolio (1994), Leithwood and Jantzi (2000), Silins and Mulford (2002). So a full conceptualization of transformational leadership is achieved, its development and inceptions should be reflectively examined. Moreover, it is likewise indispensable to determine the roles of various leadership authorities in the development of the concept about transformational relationship. These are explained in the following pages.
Despite richness of literature on leadership, Burns (1978) found that there is no central theme of leadership because scholars are from different disciplines therefore the approaches in answering questions about leadership differ significantly from each other. Because of the influence of humanistic psychology, Burns stated the possibility of generalizing the leadership is affected temporally and culturally. In his revolutionary work, Burns has set the stage so that the concept of transformational leadership would evolve over time. According to him, there needs to be an alignment of leadership with the purpose of the organization as a whole and effectiveness of leaders is assessed based on their ability to effect social changes. He also suggested conceptual unity regarding the role of leader and follower and that leadership is a process that involves the interplay between power and conflict. Burns delineated two fundamental leadership types, namely: transactional and transformational. Among transactional leaders, the intention is simply to trade something important with their leaders; for instance, if a school administrator is pleased with the performance of the hardworking teacher, he or she is given an increase in budget allowance. In contrast, "transformational leader looks for potential motives in followers, seeks to satisfy higher needs, and engages the full person of the follower" (p. 4). This resulted in the view of leadership as a mutual relationship that aims to make leaders out of followers and moral agents of leaders. The reason for proposing moral leadership is to motivate leaders to be more responsible and aspire for the satisfaction of individual member's needs. According to Burns leaders are not born or made but they are a product of evolution of structure comprising goals, values, and motivation. He also argued that because the public has heavily relied on the role of power, they have suffered from this preoccupation with power and therefore, there is a necessity to perceive leadership and power not merely inanimate objects but a string of relationships. "It lies in seeing that most powerful influences consist of deeply human relationships in which two or more persons engage with one another. It lies in a more realistic, a more sophisticated understanding of power, and of the often far more consequential exercise of mutual persuasion, exchange, elevation, and transformation - in short, of leadership" (p. 11). His definition of leadership states "leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations - the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations - of both leaders and followers" (Burns, 1978, p.19). Transactional leadership transpires when an individual initiates the making of contact with another individual with the aim of exchanging valuable things with one another. Both parties recognize differences in power relations and they both maintain in pursuing their respective objectives. These people do not share a common bond determined by their purpose. On the other hand, transformational leadership happens when at least one person engages with another and increases their morality and motivation. The base of power in this leadership type mutually is supportive of a common aim. This leadership style seeks to "raise the level of human conduct and ethical aspiration of both the leader and led, and thus it has a transforming effect on both" (Burns, 1978, p.20). Encompassed in transformational leadership is change which is beneficial to both resources and relationship of concerned parties. This changes commitment and capability of achieving the desired purpose of the organization positively. The earlier endeavor of Burns was influential in solidly defining the concepts of "transactional leadership" and "transformational leadership."
The studies Avolio and Bass (2002), Avolio (1999), Bass (1997, 1998), Bass and Avolio (1993) were follow ups to the weaknesses and shortcomings of Burns' earlier work particularly its lack of empirical evidence. In 2003, Burns published Transforming Leadership: A New Pursuit of Happiness expanded his previous book. While shedding the work of global leaders, he suggested ways in which transactional leaders can be transformational. His examination in the lives of breakthrough leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Mikhail Gorbachev, Eleanor Roosevelt, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson served as the basis for his conclusions. He also implied that his original work lacked a focus on psychology. His belief is that in understanding change and leadership, there must be an investigation of social change and human needs. He included in his exploration the perspective of leadership as a "form of power based on the possession of resources by those that hold power, as well as the interplay of the wants and needs, motives, values, and capacities of both would-be leaders and their potential followers" (p. 16). He also contended that being a leader is a moral responsibility and a response to human wants explicit in the values being held. He also believed that global leadership's challenge is to alleviate world poverty. Likewise, he claimed that, "transforming leadership begins on people's terms, driven by their wants and needs, and must culminate in expanding opportunities for happiness" (p. 230). While he examined historical and world leaders, he also focused on ways on how to become a dynamic agent of significant social change from just a mere "deal maker".
Collins (2001) conducted a similar investigation as Burns in 2003 who provided insights into world-renowned leaders. A popular author and researcher of management sciences, Collins (2001) attempted to discover how a good company transforms into a great organization. The presence of a Level 5 Leader in an organization aids in the transformation. His argument was based on a study conducted for a period of five years dissecting the secrets behind 1,435 Fortune 500 companies. Using quantitative and qualitative research designs, they provided answers to the following questions: "Can a good company become a great company, and, if so, how?". Collins concluded that 11 companies reviewed has satisfied the set of characteristics unique to a "great company" which at its heart is a person uniquely displaying the characteristics of a Level 5 Leader.
Developed by Collins (2001), the hierarchical diagram provides an outline on how an ordinary individual develops and progresses into a Level 5 Leader along with resultant increment in personal power. The characteristics of Level 5 Leaders are humility, unpretentiousness, crediting accomplishment and success to luck and others, mild-manneredness, shyness, and not wanting to receive public recognition for their prominence. They often push themselves to greater heights in producing better results and pursue successors who will continue their legacy to the organization or company. In times of adversity or struggle, they have the tendency to blame themselves and have faith that they will continue to be committed and persevering. In spite of their inadequacy, these great leaders' focus remains fixed on the well-being of the company and decide for the good of the organization in contrast to their vested interests. The foundation of the works of Burns and Collins is based on great leaders in an attempt of isolating characteristics that make Level 5 leaders extraordinary. Both authors came to the conclusion that these leaders exemplify unique characteristics. As suggested by Burns, transformational leaders "define public values that embrace the supreme and enduring principles of a people" (p. 29). The statement of Collins (2001) implied that Level 5 leaders "build enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will" (p. 20). Despite differences in the statements mentioned above, both Level 5 and transformational leaders have similar focus which is the collective organization or group of individuals. Moreover, their profiles empower their subordinates transforming the organization as a whole.
Definition of Terms
The following terms will be defined to better understand the problems of the study:
African American. This refers to the racial background that is perceived to be overrepresented in XISD in northeast Dallas, Texas.
Disproportionality . This refers to the over- or under-representation of a certain cultural group. In the case of this study, the pattern of disproportionality, specifically over-representation among male African Americans in special education services offered at a school district in Dallas, Texas. Over-representation occurs when the number of male African Americans is close to the actual number of this specific group comprising the whole special education system.
Hispanics. This refers to Americans with Hispanic or Latin American origins.
Minority. This refers to the group whose representation in society is very minimal. In sociology it is denoted as the group not constituting the majority.
White. This refers to the group of Americans that are non-colored and therefore Caucasian.
The perceptions and biases of teachers are factors related to the overrepresentation of African American males in special education Body & Ross, 1998). Educational inequity is directly related to issues of culture and race (Jost & Whitfield, 2005). There is a broadening racial imbalance between teachers and student population (Ferri & Connor, 2005). African American males are often perceived as being endangered, intellectually inept, and dangerous (Bailey & Moore, 2004; Davis, 2003; Ferguson, 2000; Kunjufu, 1986).
For this study, it will be assumed that the respondent population follows a normal distribution and that respondent groups will be adequately represented to produce conclusive results that would be useful in legislation to alleviate the problem of overrepresentation in XISD. Because the sampling procedure will be conducted randomly, the conclusion could be generalized to reflect the overall view of the special education system at a specific school district in Dallas, Texas. Another assumption will be that the respondents will truthfully answer the interviews to be implemented.
The qualitative study will explore the factors that contribute to overrepresentation of male African Americans in special education. It will likewise determine the impact of cultural bias, White/female privilege, and gender on male African Americans in special education. The responses to these problems will serve as baseline information for interventions that will be suggested to address this problem in the educational system in the US. Only the views of teachers, students with disabilities, school psychologists, and facilitators will be considered in the proposed study. The teachers to be included in the study should qualify the following criteria: current employment at the PBMAS-3 site, a teaching experience of at least five years at PBMAS-3 site, teaching assignment should be grades 3, 4, or 5, obtained a grade of "proficient in the teacher's Professional Development and Appraisal System (PDAS) evaluation, and rank of referring teacher at the PBMAS-3 site should be first, second or third. Student-respondents will be composed of both dismissed and currently enrolled during the school year 2010-2011 and regardless of the type of disability. Credibility of the study will be secured by applying five methods in analyzing data which include prolonged engagement in the field, persistent observation, triangulation, negative case analysis, checking interpretations against raw data and member-checking (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
This research narrowly evaluates the policies/procedure of XISD specifically regarding the overrepresentation of African Americans in special education. Although a review of the current literature on this topic was evaluated, and an analysis of the contemporary issues discussed, a broader view of this topic may render different results. This research specifically addresses the overrepresentation of African Americans in special educating; however, disproportionality is not exclusively an African American issue. Other minority groups as a whole and Hispanics in particular, suffer from disproportionality in special education as well. There is substantial research available that indicates a negative trend in special education referrals for Hispanic students, particularly students that may demonstrate a deficiency in English language proficiency. Another issue negated by the project is the underrepresentation of African Americans in Gifted/Talented (GT) programs; Substantial research is available regarding this topic. Most studies indicate that African-Americans represent approximately half of their total population percentage in GT programs. Research also indicates that African American students frequently lack access to GT programs, experience low teacher expectations, lack of motivation to do the work, and suffer from peer alienation (Henfield, Moore & Wood, 2008). Finally, another issue that was not investigated in this project is the unbalanced punitive measures taken against minority students when compared to their White counterparts. Research indicates there exists a disparity of exclusionary and punitive discipline administration against African American male students. African-Americans continue to be disproportionately subjected to corporal punishment, suspension, and expulsion at rates over three times their percentage in the population (Townsend, 2000, p. 381). Research seems to be building a link between unequal punitive measures against minority students and the failure and dropout rates of minority students. Studies indicate that African American students experience academic failure and dropout rates that far exceed the rates of their White counterparts.
The limitations of this study relate to the writer, the participants, and research assumptions and bias. Additionally, the research was limited to the availability of participants and participants' bias. Finally, limits of this research are also related to the exclusionary method that was utilized when evaluating the policies and procedures XISD previously used, and presently are using, to deter the overrepresentation of African Americans in the district. In other words, this study reviewed only the policies/procedures of XISD; no outside policies/procedures were evaluated to determine effectiveness. One limitation is that the data will be based on the responses to the interviews conducted by the researcher on the factors that contribute to overrepresentation and interventions that could aid alleviate overrepresentation of male African Americans in special education. Another possibility is that some respondents might not fully understand the questions that will be asked to them therefore the researcher will provide explanation to make the items in the interview guide comprehensible. To allay any anxiety during the interviews that will be conducted, the investigator will emphasize that there are no right or wrong answers.
Chapter 1 states the background of the study, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, significance of the study, nature of the study, research questions, theoretical framework, definition of terms, assumptions, scope, and limitations. The theories that will be utilized in the study are the Classical View Theory, Social Dominance Theory, Critical Race Theory, Instructional Leadership Theory, and Transformational Leadership Theory.